Tier List Speculation

[Pseudomaniac]

So here's my tier list. Based on some experience and a lot of watching others and reading. Characters are organized alphabetically within tiers; I don't have enough info to reliably organize them within their tiers.

[collapse=Tier List]
S Tier
Falco
Fox
Giga Bowser

A+ Tier
Mario
Meta Knight
Sheik
Wolf

A Tier
Diddy Kong
Ivysaur
Lucas
Peach
Snake
Wario
Yoshi

A- Tier
Link
Marth
Pit
Zero Suit Samus

B+ Tier
Bowser
Captain Falcon
Donkey Kong
Ice Climbers
Kirby
Samus
Sonic

B Tier
Charizard
Ike
Lucario
Mewtwo

B- Tier
Jigglypuff
Mr. Game & Watch
Roy

C+ Tier
Luigi
Olimar
Pikachu
R.O.B.
Toon Link

C Tier
King Dedede
Ness

C- Tier
Ganondorf
Squirtle
Zelda [/collapse]

S Tier includes characters that may need to be tweaked to be balanced, as I believe they don't have anything worse than a few neutral matchups.
A+ Tier includes the rest of the big tournament threats that every player needs to know how to counter.
A and A- Tiers include characters that are very good tournament contenders and are probably the best-balanced characters in the game.
B+ and B Tiers include viable tournament contenders that would need to see buffs or changes in the metagame to move up to the A tiers, but as of now are well-balanced and perfectly capable of winning.
B- and C+ Tiers include characters that tend to lag a little. They're still capable of winning, but they take a little more practice. They could use some tweaks.
C Tier includes characters that, while they can win a good amount of their matchups, they lack the tools to compete against several top tournament contenders in high level play.
C- Tier includes characters that need to be tweaked in order to be viable, as they have few positive matchups, especially against popular tournament characters.

Just my thoughts. I'll probably end up revising this a week or two after Apex.

 

[MattNF]

I think Link has a lot of potential. Most of his terrible moves and attributes in the past games have been brought up to par. He's no top tier, but I could see him being mid at least, and possibly mid-high if he's mastered in the same way Armada mastered Peach. Not many people to my knowledge really use him yet unfortunately so there's not much solid data we have to go off of.

Toon Link just seems bad Maybe there's something others know that I don't, but he seems like a worse version of Link and not really unique enough. Could any Toon Link mains weigh in on this? Does he have a lot of potential?

As for me, I think the worst character is Squirtle or Ness. I love playing as them, but they simply don't have the same tools and reliability as the top characters do.

But all this is kinda irrelevant for now. I think Apex results for PM could really shake things up and prove a lot of us wrong about the viability/non-viability of certain characters. Can't wait!

 

[Paradoxium]

GnW so underrated....

and what i get from this thread is that determining who is the worst in the game is futile, and determining the top ten is futile as well

that's what i call balance

 

[BJN39]

So here's my tier list. Based on some experience and a lot of watching others and reading. Characters are organized alphabetically within tiers; I don't have enough info to reliably organize them within their tiers.

[collapse=Tier List]
S Tier
Falco
Fox
Giga Bowser

A+ Tier
Mario
Meta Knight
Sheik
Wolf

A Tier
Diddy Kong
Ivysaur
Lucas
Peach
Snake
Wario
Yoshi

A- Tier
Link
Marth
Pit
Zero Suit Samus

B+ Tier
Bowser
Captain Falcon
Donkey Kong
Ice Climbers
Kirby
Samus
Sonic

B Tier
Charizard
Ike
Lucario
Mewtwo

B- Tier
Jigglypuff
Mr. Game & Watch
Roy

C+ Tier
Luigi
Olimar
Pikachu
R.O.B.
Toon Link

C Tier
King Dedede
Ness

C- Tier
Ganondorf
Squirtle
Zelda [/collapse]

S Tier includes characters that may need to be tweaked to be balanced, as I believe they don't have anything worse than a few neutral matchups.
A+ Tier includes the rest of the big tournament threats that every player needs to know how to counter.
A and A- Tiers include characters that are very good tournament contenders and are probably the best-balanced characters in the game.
B+ and B Tiers include viable tournament contenders that would need to see buffs or changes in the metagame to move up to the A tiers, but as of now are well-balanced and perfectly capable of winning.
B- and C+ Tiers include characters that tend to lag a little. They're still capable of winning, but they take a little more practice. They could use some tweaks.
C Tier includes characters that, while they can win a good amount of their matchups, they lack the tools to compete against several top tournament contenders in high level play.
C- Tier includes characters that need to be tweaked in order to be viable, as they have few positive matchups, especially against popular tournament characters.

Just my thoughts. I'll probably end up revising this a week or two after Apex.

Just wondering, what in particular about her in your mind warrants Zelda at the bottom?

 

[Frank Curtis]

Tier Lists are usually made from tournament results. If anybody wants to take a look at the tournament archives for 3.0 so far and go from there, here it is. http://smashboards.com/threads/3-0-tournament-results-archive-12-31-13.344216/

 

[Kink-Link5]

I agree with Kinky on Yoshi being really ****ing good, but putting him on the level on Fox and Falco in terms of stage control and matchups versus the rest of cast...that's way too early to say. Shield parrying getting fixed would be pretty damn bonkers with how good he is now.

I also approve of Kink not buying into the Mario hype and realizing other characters like Pit, Wolf, and even Link have much better toolsets.

I had Mario higher in previous demos, but between the larger cast and less than stellar showings against other characters, he's moved into a more moderate position.

 

[Frank Curtis]

Tier Lists are usually made from tournament results. If anybody wants to take a look at the tournament archives for 3.0 so far and go from there, here it is. http://smashboards.com/threads/3-0-tournament-results-archive-12-31-13.344216/

 

[Kink-Link5]

Tier Lists are usually made from tournament results. If anybody wants to take a look at the tournament archives for 3.0 so far and go from there, here it is. http://smashboards.com/threads/3-0-tournament-results-archive-12-31-13.344216/

This is very false. Tournament results may influence how people view characters, but tier lists for the official games in the smash community have always been by backroom vote, based on how players feel characters do against the rest of the cast, and how those matchups are weighted based on the relationships between character matchups.

 

[Vashimus]

Tier Lists are usually made from tournament results. If anybody wants to take a look at the tournament archives for 3.0 so far and go from there, here it is. http://smashboards.com/threads/3-0-tournament-results-archive-12-31-13.344216/

Tier lists are decided by matchups, not tournament results. Otherwise, Bowser would be unanimously considered one of the best characters in the game, and Donkey Kong should be propelled to top tier for how many times Strong Bad's won a tourney.

 

[Lukingordex]

Tier lists are decided by matchups, not tournament results.

Tier lists should be decided by matchups, but that's not what exactly happens.

 

[Juushichi]

Game and Watch is pretty aptly positioned by most, Paradoxium.

imo he is Mid Tier at best, Lower Mid Tier at worst.

 

[Paradoxium]

Game and Watch is pretty aptly positioned by most, Paradoxium.

imo he is Mid Tier at best, Lower Mid Tier at worst.

have faith bro, with solid reads he ***** everyone

 

[Frank Curtis]

Usually I thought characters who rank really high placements in tournaments tend to show that they have some really good matchups against other characters because of player performance. But from what I'm reading, then I guess there hasn't been a vote on characters in 3.0 yet? Hmmm.....

 

[Juushichi]

3.0 has been out a month.

Also @ Paradoxium. Mid tier characters are not bad characters in this game. I believe that most mid tier characters can win a fair amount of MUs because the quality gaps between the tiers are not as wide. But they are still there. GnW unfortunately doesn't have a ton of good MUs among the considered top of the cast... and iirc, he doesn't have a single winning one up there. But he can fight all of them (except Fox). At least IMO.

 

[Paradoxium]

3.0 has been out a month.

Also @ Paradoxium. Mid tier characters are not bad characters in this game. I believe that most mid tier characters can win a fair amount of MUs because the quality gaps between the tiers are not as wide. But they are still there. GnW unfortunately doesn't have a ton of good MUs among the considered top of the cast... and iirc, he doesn't have a single winning one up there. But he can fight all of them (except Fox). At least IMO.

tbh i find tier lists in pm to be irrelevant, and i used to think gnw was really bad but it seems that disjointed hit boxes still give people trouble, to me it just seems all his moves are perfect. and that power though, its so easy to ko, and combined with his wavelands hes very fast. He just seems too solid to be mid tier

and everyone has so much trouble determining who the low tier and mid tier characters are, i mean i was positive DDD was the worst, then Fly got first place on super smash sundays

 

[Strong Badam]

Tier lists are relevant
Not as relevant as in unbalanced games but still relevant.

 

[Paradoxium]

Tier lists are relevant
Not as relevant as in unbalanced games but still relevant.

at this point im not even sure if fox and falco are the best anymore like everyone claims they are, right now the tier list is doodoo
its just speculation, i have a feeling that everyone's predictions are way off

and do you have dolphin netplay???????

 

[Kink-Link5]

Posting this preemptively before Hax waveshine gimp 4 stocks everyone in the Apex PM Bracket.

 

[Thane of Blue Flames]

I wanna see some spacies get *WRECKED*.

 

[Rat]

Tier lists are based on opinions and here-say.

Doesn't make 'em irrelevant though.

 

[Paradoxium]

Tier lists are based on opinions and here-say.

Doesn't make 'em irrelevant though.

not completely irrelevant, but they are very unreliable

 

[Pseudomaniac]

Just wondering, what in particular about her in your mind warrants Zelda at the bottom?

First off, I don't think she's the absolute worst. She's definitely better than Ganondorf and Squirtle, and this game being balanced as it is, she has some good matchups against some higher-tier common tournament characters (Bowser especially).

However, she gets bodied pretty hard by characters that can get around her Din's Fire, as she's easy to juggle and dies at really low percents. She's a textbook glass cannon, so she does pretty well against characters that can't get around Din's Fire (or players who don't know how, for that matter). However, I think a lot of common high tiers, such as the spacies, Sheik, Snake, and Wario, can give her a lot of trouble when played right.

As others have mentioned, this game is still recent enough that the tier list can change dramatically, especially after seeing the results of a major tournament like Apex. Zelda could still rise, but I think that she will struggle with a large amount of the cast, hence why she's in the bottom tier.

 

[Juushichi]

[etc etc etc] He just seems too solid to be mid tier [etc etc etc]

In most balanced games, being solid lends itself to being mid tier. Look comparitively at these descriptors: Great - Good - Solid - Mediocre. If you assign them at letter grade, it translates to A - B - C - D. logically progressing past Mediocre, you get Failing / F. Solid is right in the middle of this scale.

I guess if you hold it just just 4, it lends itself to interpretation more. I dunno what other people see in terms of this game, but I see Good and Solid being different flavors of Mid Tier. A closer in quality mid tier, but one nonetheless. The difference between Vanilla and French Vanilla.

 

[Deleted member]

Here's the definition I used for the MBR 2010 tier list:

A tier list is a list of characters ranked best to worst in their likelihood to perform well in a tournament setting in the near future based on recent, relevant tournament results. We then separate characters at statistically significant gaps to be grouped with their relative equals, and those groupings are called "tiers". A tier list is, in essence, a "prediction" list as to how any given character will fare in a competitive setting. We naturally assume top level of play.

 

[Frank Curtis]

Here's the definition I used for the MBR 2010 tier list:

A tier list is a list of characters ranked best to worst in their likelihood to perform well in a tournament setting in the near future based on recent, relevant tournament results. We then separate characters at statistically significant gaps to be grouped with their relative equals, and those groupings are called "tiers". A tier list is, in essence, a "prediction" list as to how any given character will fare in a competitive setting. We naturally assume top level of play.

So tier list are based off of tournament results after all.

 

[Deleted member]

not strictly, but yeap. we have to factor in players too. for example it's reasonable to say that marth is worse than he used to be because back when he was top tier, both of the best players in the US played marth. if you're less likely to lose to marth, he's clearly not as good, and since goodness is relative he was correctly moved to a lower position.

 

[Frank Curtis]

Well of course player skill has to be accounted for, but still it's good to know that I'm not insane when I question how some tier lists are made just based off of player vote.

 

[Deleted member]

player vote comes from many facets which one of many reasons that membership has always been filtered so heavily. you'd expect this to have some effect where everyone thinks the same thing but it was actually surprisingly diverse given the depth of the information. i miss that stuff. anyway the main facet is tournament results. match-ups are pretty much not accounted for at all and frankly they shouldn't be because it's misleading in terms of actual performance.

 

[QQQQQQQ7777777]

I find it hilarious that with how diverse the entire game and everyone who plays it is, you can beat every high level player out there and then get 4-stocked by some no-name because you`re not compatible with their playstyle. Of course there is a lot of skill involved and you won't be losing to people who suck at the game no matter what but I find it amazing how different this game is from other fighting games

 

[Frank Curtis]

Indeed. That is what makes balanced fighters fun.

 

[9bit]

I find it hilarious that with how diverse the entire game and everyone who plays it is, you can beat every high level player out there and then get 4-stocked by some no-name because you`re not compatible with their playstyle. Of course there is a lot of skill involved and you won't be losing to people who suck at the game no matter what but I find it amazing how different this game is from other fighting games

That's what makes crew battles so interesting in Smash. You can counter pick players as well as just characters because playstyle can matter so much.

 

[QQQQQQQ7777777]

Indeed. That is what makes balanced fighters fun.

yes, but this was even true for Melee and that was unbalanced no matter what anyone says. In any (other) fighting game (balanced or not) you only have one way to play a character. You can use different moves but if you arn't told who's playing you would never know. Quoting the smash brothers documentary here: "In smash you can look at a Marth and tell if it's Ken, Azen, or Neo. You can see a style in a person's character and that's what makes smash amazing" written from memory so I may have quoted something wrong.

 

[Paradoxium]

not strictly, but yeap. we have to factor in players too. for example it's reasonable to say that marth is worse than he used to be because back when he was top tier, both of the best players in the US played marth. if you're less likely to lose to marth, he's clearly not as good, and since goodness is relative he was correctly moved to a lower position.

How come you know so much about smash? honestly it's like every time you have a well written essay to answer a question lol, who are you really?

 

[QQQQQQQ7777777]

How come you know so much about smash? honestly it's like every time you have a well written essay to answer a question lol, who are you really?

Sakurai, obviously he has a guilty pleasure for the competitive smash community.

 

[DMG]

He's a smart guy that plays Smash. Question answered

He also articulates things in a way that most people can't or don't

 

[Paradoxium]

Umbreon just sounds like he's a good player, but I remember strong bad saying that he sucks, so I dunno

 

[DMG]

Bahaha

He suks for not entering more events, just like me

(He's actually very good and I don't recommend playing against him unless you want yer lunch monies taken)

HI ARMADA I SEE YOU LOOKING AT THIS THREAD

 

[Deleted member]

i used to be a good player. i stopped playing seriously when i started college in mid 2006 ish. i've just been around a long time and talked to the right people. it adds up. i started out just like everyone else, ignorant and stupid lmao

edit: if strongbad said i suck he is 100% correct.

 

[Paradoxium]

ARMADA I LOVE YOU, GO TO APEX ILL ROOT FOR YOU!!

 

[Paradoxium]

edit: if strongbad said i suck he is 100% correct.

Everything Strong Bad says is 100% correct